Flap over mural in J.Lo ad

[MASTERBAKER]

Flap over mural in J.Lo ad

A group of Bronx graffiti artists is seeing red because one of their murals is being used without permission in a car commercial featuring Jennifer Lopez driving around town professing love for her old neighborhood.

The Fiat spot has already come under fire because the scenes where she’s supposed to be driving through the Big Apple were actually shot in LA.

The ad has an eye-catching shot of the mural, located in Parkchester underneath the No. 6 train station, which says, “I love The Bronx.” (pictured)

Wilfredo Feliciano, 45, an artist with TATS Cru, says no one from the group was contacted before Fiat ran the shot of the graffiti, which he said has been copyrighted.

“Everyone started congratulating us on the commercial and we’re like, what commercial?” he told The Post, adding that they’ve called their lawyer.

A spokeswoman for Fiat said the company is investigating whether the image was “appropriately secured.”

tim.perone@nypost.com

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/...in_lo_ad_4m5M1Y5fLNgT4nl3lWvMCO#ixzz1f6oaIxrC


see my thread-Jenny was nowhere near the block ....

http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=633140&highlight=jenny+block

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/deNRiBQiQ3Q?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/deNRiBQiQ3Q?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>

 

[crazyace718]

Niggas copyright graffiti now? I thought that shit was illegal.

 

[The Untouchable GDFOLKS]

Niggas copyright graffiti now? I thought that shit was illegal.

Not if the property owner lets you do it.

 

[Crown&Coke]

They do realize that plenty of commercials and movies are not shot on the location they say they are?​

 

[Zero]

Cats are smart to copyright their work, a LOT of graffiti artists had their work showcased or profited form in some way and didn't see shit. There are famous murals all over the country being used in adds and films and the artists never see a penny. Hell, they have even made prints of some famous graffiti work and sold them without so much as notifying the artists.

An artist can paint a wall and I can come in the next day and take a pic of the wall they painted and make a killing off of the prints (if it is marketable) and never show the actual artist a dime. You can't just come up on any other type of media that way and not get challenged in court.

 

[John_Gault]

Speaking as a former Graf artist though, I would want to get paid for my work being 'featured'. However, my legal mind wonders IF 'TATS' crew even owns the mural? They do A LOT OF MURALS in New York, literally everywhere. And the MAJORITY are paid for, as they are signage for businesses. And as such, the business owners paid for the 'murals/signage and therefore owns that creative property. And if it is signage, businesses aren't entitled to recompense for their businesses being visible on camera.


HOWEVER, if it's a self sponsored mural they may have cause to pursue compensation. But it can be disputed though. . . . And it was rather DUMB for Fiat to 'fake' a 'Jenny from the block'/NYC Bronx neighborhood narrative, in LA no less.

TATS needs to get some 'work' up outta these FIAT cats, instead of suing them for one meager payday.


JG